W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > August 2009

Re: URI Template experience

From: Mike Burrows <asplake@googlemail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 11:23:41 +0100
Message-ID: <7a2269960908230323r3a8c9c36v9a3d0a13355ae404@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Joe Gregorio <joe@bitworking.org>, URI <uri@w3.org>
Thanks again.  Couple of comments now that I've had a change to build the doc:

1) It would be very useful to be able to specify that a variable is
mandatory, to prevent invalid expansions such as
    http://users/{userid}/settings
to
    http://users//settings
(not to mention others that look less clearly invalid but are still
not the intention of the template)

This will give much more reliable feedback to the client than a
server-side validation ever could.  This can be achieved without
changing the syntax simply by specifying that an error is raised by a
Simple or Reserved substitution, if the variable has not been assigned
and no default value is specified.

Nothing is lost with my proposal - this template:
    http://users/{userid=}
will expand in the unassigned case to be
    http://users/

Others may have good reasons to propose additional syntax though.

2) Can (or should) the new syntax have a neat way (or any way at all!)
to support things like optional file extensions?  Like them or loathe
them they're important out there in the wild - try modeling a
multi-format Rails application efficiently without them.

In the old syntax {-prefix|.|format} did the trick nicely; something
like {.format} might be a good fit now (it's in the spirit of the new
/ operator) but perhaps it could be generalised.  Or did I miss a
trick in the new syntax?

Regards,
Mike


2009/8/21 Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>:
> On Aug 20, 2009, at 11:31 PM, Mike Burrows wrote:
>
>> Has there been any progress on URI Templates since the last flurry of
>> mails in early June?  Would a sneak preview of the new syntax be
>> possible?
>
> I actually did a lot of work on it just prior to the IETF
> deadline, but failed to make it far enough for a new draft
> before needing to switch back to httpbis.  You can see it
> in the work area:
>
> http://uri-templates.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/spec/
>
> draft-gregorio-uritemplate.xml
>
> I will swap back in soon,
>
> ....Roy
>
>
Received on Sunday, 23 August 2009 10:24:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:42 GMT